One of the most promising technologies that has developed (and been cost reduced) over the last several years in the tech word has to be 3-D printing. 3-D printing allows manufacturers to quickly prototype products using varying materials, and Nokia is now talking about its efforts in the field with the Lumia 820 3-D printing community project.

The key to the 3-D printing community project has to do with the creation and release of the number of 3-D templates, case specifications, recommended materials, and best practices. The idea is to allow the community to 3-D print their own shell for Lumia 820 smartphone. The removable shell of the phone is one of the most interesting design features of this Windows Phone 8 device.

Nokia says that it is offering the required files and documents for 3-D printing your own shell for the smartphone as the 3-D printing Development Kit or 3DK.

Nokia Community & Developer Marketing Manager John Kneeland said of 3-D printing, "In the future, I envision wildly more modular and customizable phones. Perhaps in addition to our own beautifully-designed phones, we could sell some kind of phone template, and entrepreneurs the world over could build a local business on building phones precisely tailored to the needs of his or her local community. You want a waterproof, glow-in-the-dark phone with a bottle-opener and a solar charger? Someone can build it for you—or you can print it yourself!"

Being able to 3-D printed custom cases for Nokia smartphones is an interesting feature. While most consumers don't have access to a 3-D printer (although Staples is looking to change this), the Nokia 3DK does open the door for 3-D printing companies to start producing all sorts of interesting accessories for the Lumia 820.

Let's not forget that the initial retina iPad 3 was thicker and heavier than the iPad 2 that it replaced. Thickness and weight were widely advertised as key improvements to the iPad 2 when it was released.

In Apple's world whatever features their new product has is the best even if it got worse from previous versions just like the weight and thickness. Take the mini, they say it's the best but the pixel density is pretty horrible by today's standards yet an Apple fan, who have gone on and on about how pixel density is the most important, now say it's not so important.It's quite sad how brainwashed people are.

I know loads of iDevice users who passed on the iPad mini because of pixel density. Other people don't mind the pixel density at the expense of the display, but that's their choice. I'm not a fan of the mini, but whatever. My biggest complaint with the iPad 3 is also the increase in weight over the 2. The iPad 2 feels nearly perfect in comparison, but the laws of physics prevent driving the display of a newer iPad with a lighter device for the time being.

Again, whatever, everything is all about compromises. Everyone deals with that, even people really who love a certain company's products understand tradeoffs. These are far smaller issues people accept like the failure rate of the XBox 360 (I had three replacements) or the sheer quantity of cheap/bad Android phones and tablets that some people deal with.

Yes, life is indeed about compromises and choice. That's why we love open ecosystems that lets manufacturers serve every niche. We can get AMOLED, a stylus, big screens, small screens with lower prices, unibody case, non-unibody with replaceable memory/battery, etc. No compromise is universally optimal.

As for poor products, why are you calling them bad Android phones instead of just bad phones? Samsung and HTC have solid customer satisfaction, and there's no need to associate their products with those of a poor manufacturer just because they're all in the Android category. I see you don't associate Apple with a low quality manufacturer just because they're both in the smartphone category.

quote: As for poor products, why are you calling them bad Android phones instead of just bad phones? Samsung and HTC have solid customer satisfaction, and there's no need to associate their products with those of a poor manufacturer just because they're all in the Android category.

The huge Android marketshare that people like to brag about is almost all in low end devices. If we're talking high end then it still belongs to Apple based on the fact that an old device like the 4S outsold the GS2, GS3, and GN2 combined, over half of mobile traffic and app downloads are iOS, Google still makes more money serving ads from iOS than Android, etc etc.

If people want to keep talking about huge Android marketshare then those low end devices are completely fair to talk about in context.

quote: Yes, life is indeed about compromises and choice. That's why we love open ecosystems that lets manufacturers serve every niche. We can get AMOLED, a stylus, big screens, small screens with lower prices, unibody case, non-unibody with replaceable memory/battery, etc. No compromise is universally optimal.

I completely agree and I've brought your points up numerous times. For other people, having the compromises that come along with better apps and developer support, faster and more optimized hardware, and great vendor support are worth it.

There's no such thing as a perfect ecosystem, just pick the best one for you. Or in my case, buy a bunch of things from different ecosystems. :)

"Game reviewers fought each other to write the most glowing coverage possible for the powerhouse Sony, MS systems. Reviewers flipped coins to see who would review the Nintendo Wii. The losers got stuck with the job." -- Andy Marken